Research On The Form Of Sin Of Environmental Pollution Crime

With the continuous development of China's social economy,as a by-product of the sustained and high-speed growth of GDP in the past 30 years,the problem of environmental pollution has become increasingly prominent.Both the national level and the general public are paying more and more attention to environmental protection.The development concept of "green water and green mountains are golden mountains and silver mountains" has risen to the height of the national development strategy.In this context,the Criminal Law Amendment(8)in 2011 amended the "crime of major environmental pollution accidents" to "crime of pollution of the environment".In 2013 and 2016,the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate published the "Interpretation of Several Questions of Applicable Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Environmental Pollution" twice to determine the crime of pollution of the environment.The criteria were specifically defined.The legislator's intention is to lower the threshold of environmental pollution crime,reverse the trend of ecological environment deterioration from the source,and crack down on environmental pollution.However,at present,scholars have different opinions on what the subjective form of the crime of polluting the environment is forming three doctrines: intentional doctrine,negligence doctrine and mixed doctrine,resulting in different judges in judicial practice on the basis of their own support of the theory of the same charge made a completely opposite expression and interpretation.It damages the authority of the rule of law,and ultimately weakens the judicial punishment of environmental crimes,thus greatly reducing the legislative purpose and implementation effect of the state to improve the environment.Based on this background,this paper firstly investigates the theory and practice of criminal punishment for extraterritorial environmental pollution crime.In both Anglo-American law system and continental law system countries,the subjective forms of culpability of environmental pollution crime are strictly and meticulously classified,and the intentional behavior and culpability of environmental pollution crime are clearly defined by legal provisions.The misconduct is defined separately and the subjective malignancy of the actor is taken as an important basis for penalty.Compared with China's current investigation of criminal responsibility for environmental pollution crimes,the relevant foreign environmental criminal law regulations are more systematic and perfect,more comprehensive consideration of various specific circumstances,and more rigorous criminal law network.Then this paper makes a detailed study of the cases that have been convicted and punished by this crime in judicial practice since the amendment of the Criminal Law(8)of 2011 amended the crime of polluting the environment.Through statistical data,it reveals the adverse effects on the trial of specific cases due to the unclear form of the crime of polluting the environment,and the existing crime of this crime.The three doctrines of the form of culpability are analyzed rationally,the focus of controversy is clarified,and the advantages and disadvantages of each doctrine are expounded.Finally,on the basis of judicial practice and extraterritorial experience,this paper puts forward the judgment criteria and suggestions on the form of culpability of pollution crime in China from the operational level,and puts forward that the specific pollution behavior should be divided into three types,namely,stealing discharge,straight discharge and leakage,and the culpability should be determined separately.The significance of this point of view is to deepen the theoretical study of the crime of polluting the environment,which is conducive to the further legislative perfection of the crime,and as a starting point for the judicial practice of how to accurately grasp and define the crime of thinking and theoretical guidance.